U.S. to yield marijuana jurisdiction to states?

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is sending strong signals that President Obama – who as a candidate said states should be allowed to make their own rules on medical marijuana – will end raids on pot dispensaries in California.

Asked at a Washington news conference Wednesday about Drug Enforcement Administration raids in California since Obama took office last month, Holder said the administration has changed its policy.

“What the president said during the campaign, you’ll be surprised to know, will be consistent with what we’ll be doing here in law enforcement,” he said. “What he said during the campaign is now American policy.”

Bill Piper, national affairs director of the Drug Policy Alliance, a marijuana advocacy group, said the statement is encouraging.

“I think it definitely signals that Obama is moving in a new direction, that it means what he said on the campaign trail that marijuana should be treated as a health issue rather than a criminal justice issue,” he said.

Piper said Obama has also indicated he will drop the federal government’s long-standing opposition to health officials’ needle-exchange programs for drug users.

3 thoughts on “U.S. to yield marijuana jurisdiction to states?”

You all better quit worrying about this little stuff and get on the ball about the 10th cause today big O sat with the PM of England and openly stated that the New World Order is the solution for the problems we have ( a few he helped create ). So the proverbial crap is hitting the fan and you people are still worried about whether you can get loaded or not???? Do you think they’ll allow you to smoke weed in a FEMA detention camp???? Do you think you will have money to buy dope when they give all our money away for a Global New Deal??? Wake up and get on your state reps to do this before it is too late !!!!! Goooooooooooooooo

DJ – it seems to me that you’re missing the point here, or are possibly misunderstanding exactly what the 10th Amendment is all about.

It’s pretty simple – and says that there are only a small number of activities that the federal government is authorized to engage in – everything else is to be left “to the States, respectively, or to the People.”

Since there’s nothing, whatsoever, in the constitution which authorizes the federal government to engage in a “drug war” or imprison people for owning, growing, smoking or selling a common plant, all such activity is a violation of the 10th Amendment, and the Constitution itself.

Those who believe in the principles of liberty, the foundations of the constitution, and the limits on the government from the 10th Amendment – should support all measures which return powers to the state and the people. Opposing the drug war is a big part of that movement.

The principle is important whether it’s about the economy, bailouts, federal police, or something simple like pot. The federal government is not authorized, by the constitution for many things. We applaud any move towards decentralization of power.

Micheal, I think DJ understands the 10th Amendment just fine. I think what he was saying is that it seems like Obama is suggesting policy changes that (if they were to take place) would render the 10th Amendment as well as the rest of the Constitution, moot and irrelevant.